Navigating the End of Time’ sets a course for a navigation of the dangerous ways that Armageddon-watchers have invented or twisted prophecies to their own advantage. Rashid draws on examples of how both Muslim and non-Muslim millenarians have cajoled and brainwashed followers, in many cases, to their doom. The trials and tribulations of our time are indisputable, but Rashid lays bare the fitan which are essentially a result of our own miseducation or dependence on the products of the industrial revolution—the apotheosis of which is the smart phone in our hand—which completes what has been called the mass-formation (or crowd psychosis) of our ‘technic society’.

Navigating the End of Time: A Book by Asrar Rashid - Find Book Navigating the End of Time: A Book by Asrar Rashid - Find Book

According to the intent of Haḍrat Mawlānā [Qāsim Nānotwī], the Prophet ﷺ will not be called ‘Khātam’ of this earth only. Rather, his prophethood, both in terms of time and status, is a seal for the prophets of all seven earths. [54] He offers a number of evidences for why he believes the earlier prophets derive their prophethood from the Prophet Muḥammad ﷺ. He accepts these evidences are “abductive” ( innī) – that is, arguing the cause from its effects, which is not a definitive form of evidence. But he develops a cumulative case which he argues offers strong support for his claim. [43]

You may also like…

Allāmah ‘Abd al-Ḥayy Laknawī agreed with Mawlānā Qāsim Nānotwī on the authenticity of the report of Ibn ‘Abbās. He explicitly opposed the declarations of disbelief and deviation that occurred in this matter. In a work he authored in 1880 in refutation of Ṣiddīq Ḥasan Khān Qinnawajī, he wrote: Let us now turn to how Asrar Rashid irresponsbily presents three “quotes” from Taḥdhīr al-Nās to forge a link between Deobandīs and Qādiyānīs. In a section of his book titled “Wahhābī/Deobandī Support” (i.e. of Qādiyānīs), he writes: The narration is a commentary on a verse of the Qur’ān which states: “It is Allah who created the seven heavens and of the earth the same [number], the command descending down through all of them.” [18] In commenting on this, Ibn ‘Abbās (Allāh be pleased with him) said: “In each earth there is the like of Ibrāhīm”, and in another version: “Seven earths, in each earth there is a prophet like your prophet, an Ādam like your Ādam, a Nūḥ like your Nūḥ, an Ibrāhīm like your Ibrāhīm and an ‘Īsā like your ‘Īsā.” [19]

Navigating the end of time Archives - Sunnibooks

He also argued that superiority in status entails superiority of laws, and the superior-most law must also be the endmost law, hence the Prophet ﷺ must be the endmost prophet. In an 1877 transcript of a debate, he said: There is no position or rank higher than the seal of the ranks of prophethood. All ranks fall below this. Hence, his laws will supersede the laws of all others. The laws of others will not supersede his. It is thus necessary that he is the seal in terms of time too because the turn of the highest authority occurs after all subordinate authorities. Therefore, his judgement is the endmost judgement. It is evident that a legal case is only taken to the supreme court after all else. Morever, Ḥakīm Nūr al-Dīn studied with other famous scholars like Mawlānā Irshād Ḥusayn (1832 – 1893) of Rampur [71] (Ḥakīm Nūr al-Dīn spent three years in Rampur for studies [72]), Mawlānā Raḥmatullāh Kīrānawī (1818 – 1891) [73] and Shāh ‘Abd al-Ghanī Dihlawī. [74] He attended more than a single lecture of theirs. Why are they not implicated in Asrar Rashid’s conspiracy-laden discourse? Nūr al-Dīn Bhairawī (1841 – 1914 CE) was a close companion and ally of the notorious false prophet, Mirzā Ghulām Aḥmad Qādiyānī (1839 – 1908). He was also the “first khalīfah” of the Qādiyānī group. Asrar Rashid’s reference for the above account is a biography of Ḥakīm Nūr al-Dīn Bhairawī by a Qādiyānī author titled: “ Hakeem Noor-Ud-Deen: The Way of the Righteous”. [68] Nowhere in this biography does it say that Ḥakīm Nūr al-Dīn “attended lectures at the Deoband seminary”, nor that he “fell under the influence of Qāsim al-Nānawtawī on finality of prophethood”. It appears these are entirely fictional additions by Asrar Rashid himself. Hence, the next questions for Asrar Rashid are:The common people, based on their belief in the famousness of chronological finality as its meaning, regard sealship limited to time to be the absolute and total meaning…What the author of Taḥdhīr al-Nās meant was that the common people consider the whole meaning and the assigned literal meaning of “Seal” to be the last in time, hence they consider it impermissible to take other meanings. Yet, the reality [according to the author of Taḥdhīr al-Nās] is that the meaning of “Seal” is the last, whether in terms of time, location or position. At the level of the essence, this meaning is general and these specifications play no part. [59] In his earlier work ‘Islam Answers Atheism’, Asrar Rashid enters the territories of the New Atheists and those pursuing kufr humanistic sciences—particularly those bent on debunking a Divine Reality. Intent on showing the false trails laid out for the unwary, he aims to rescue those who have been misled by showing the weakness and fallacies in their arguments and that in most cases, behind their disparagement and denigration, the Hand of God is merely replaced by straw-man arguments, emotional content, and fantasy. ‘Navigating the End of Time’ sets a course for a navigation of the dangerous ways that Armageddon-watchers have invented or twisted prophecies to their own advantage. Rashid draws on examples of how both Muslim and non-Muslim millenarians have cajoled and brainwashed followers, in many cases, to their doom. The trials and tribulations of our time are indisputable, but Rashid lays bare the fitan which are essentially a result of our own miseducation or dependence on the products of the industrial revolution—the apotheosis of which is the smart phone in our hand—which completes what has been called the mass-formation (or crowd psychosis) of our ‘technic society’. These he juxtaposes with the language of the Qurʾān and the key prophecies of the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) and what he says about the fitan of the End Times. These eschatological matters were further collected and mapped out by a few Muḥaddithūn and Rashid gently teaches us how to map read; ‘Do not travel there until you learn to read the signs properly, and if possible find a very good guide.’ If it were legally possible for a prophet to be appointed after the Prophet ﷺ according to the deceased Mawlānā [Qāsim Nānotwī], he would not have used the word “hypothetically” ( bi ‘l-farz). The term “hypothetically” itself indicates it is impossible, the clear meaning of which is that this is impossible and in no way is it possible [for it to occur]. However, if in hypothetically assuming the impossible, for a short while this impossibility [of a future prophet being born] were to be entertained, even then there would be no difference to the positional sealship of the Prophet ﷺ, his excellence and supremacy. [62]

Navigating the End of Time - Eventbrite Navigating the End of Time - Eventbrite

In Taḥdhīr al-Nās, Mawlānā Qāsim Nānotwī couches this argument in an esoteric meaning of the prophetic title “Khātam al-Nabiyyīn”, referred to in the verse of the Qur’ān: “Muḥammad is not the father of any of your men, but the messenger of Allāh ( rasūlAllāh) and the seal of prophets ( khātam al-nabiyyīn).” [27] While the plain meaning of “Khātam al-Nabiyyīn” is “the last chronological prophet”, a more subtle or esoteric meaning was propounded by some scholars. Mawlānā Qāsim Nānotwī responds to this objection in Tanwīr al-Nibrās. He explains that he too takes chronological finality as a meaning of the verse as he goes on to explain in Taḥdhīr al-Nās, so he is not describing merely understanding “chronological finality” from the term “Khātam al-Nabiyyīn” as “the understanding of the common people”. Rather, he is referring to a restriction of the meaning of “Khātam al-Nabiyyīn” to chronological finality, and this is what he describes as the “understanding of the common people”. His contention is that it is not restricted to this meaning alone, but encompasses a broader meaning. Hence, his observation that “in the understanding of the common people, the Messenger of Allāh ﷺ being the ‘seal’ is in the sense that his time comes after the time of the previous prophets” means in the restricted or limited sense. [58] Navigating the End of Time sets a course for a navigation of the dangerous ways that Armageddon-watchers have invented or twisted prophecies to their own advantage. Rashid draws on examples of how both Muslim and non-Muslim millenarians have cajoled and brainwashed followers, in many cases, to their doom. The trials and tribulations of our time are indisputable, but Rashid lays bare the fitan which are essentially a result of a our own miseducation or dependence on the products of the industrial revolution the apotheosis of which is the smart phone in our hand which completes what has been called the mass-formation (or crowd psychosis) of our 'technic society'. These he juxtaposes with the language of the Qur'an and the key prophecies of the Messenger of Allah & and what he says about the fitan of the End Times. These eschatological matters were further collected and mapped out by a few Muhaddithun and Rashid gently teaches us how to map read; 'Do not travel there until you learn to read the signs properly, and if possible find a very good guide.'The first half of the book will almost certainly save people from falling for any claim that misinterprets known signs of the hour or false claimants of being the Mahdi. It looks closely at cult leaders and their methods and how to protect oneself from their lies, delusion or mental illness. Ibṭāl Aghlāṭ Qāsimiyyah [1300 H]: Upon the suggestion of Mawlawī ‘Ubaydullāh, the imām of Jāmi‘ Masjid at Mombay (a Murīd of Mawlānā Faḍl-i-Rasūl Badāyūnī), an individual ‘Abd al-Ghaffār put this treatise together as a refutation of Taḥdhīr al-Nās. According to ‘Abd al-Ghaffār, the individual who put it together, a debate occurred in Delhi between Mawlānā Muḥammad Qāsim Nānotwī and Mawlawī Muḥammad Shāh Punjābī on the contents of Taḥdhīr al-Nās. Putting together a question with the views of them both, ‘Abd al-Ghaffār acquired signatures against Mawlānā Muḥammad Qāsim from the ‘Ulamā’. Along with others, this treatise has the signatures of Mawlānā ‘Abd al-Qādir Badāyūnī, Mawlawī Muḥibb Aḥmad Badāyūnī (student of Mawlānā ‘Abd al-Qādir Badāyūnī), Mawlawī Faṣīḥuddīn (author of Qawl al-Faṣīḥ), Mawlawī ‘Ubaydullāh, the imām of Jāmi‘ Masjid at Mombay, and others. [89] It was Mawlānā Qāsim Nānotwī’s detailed response to this question, as well as ‘Allāmah ‘Abd al-Ḥayy Laknawī’s brief response, that would be printed as Taḥdhīr al-Nās min Inkār Athar Ibn ‘Abbās in 1873 from Mawlānā Aḥsan Nānotwī’s printing press in Bareilly. As is evident, the question that Mawlānā Aḥsan Nānotwī had in relation to the report of Ibn ‘Abbās (Allāh be pleased with him) was primarily about the status of the Prophet Muḥammad ﷺ. If there are counterparts to the Prophet ﷺ on other earths, does that call into question the Prophet ﷺ being the superior-most creation of Allāh? The question was not over the chronological finality of the Prophet Muḥammad ﷺ, which was never in question. Al-Nānawtawī said: “To interpret the ‘finality of Prophethood’ as the ‘Last Prophet’ is a misconception in the minds of the general public – this meaning is incorrect according to the learned”; “Even if a prophet were to be born after the Holy Prophet ﷺ, the finality of the Prophet ﷺ would not be affected in any way” and “Even if it were assumed that a new prophet can come during the era of the Holy Prophet or after him ﷺ, it would not have effect on the finality of our Prophet ﷺ.” These statements gave birth to an unprecedented debate on the finality of the Prophet Muḥammad. [64]

Asrar Rashid - ‘Navigating the End of Time’ by Shaykh Asrar Rashid - ‘Navigating the End of Time’ by Shaykh

Qāsim al-Nānawtawī – the founder of the Deoband Movement – was a prolific author who had garnered a sizeable following in the Subcontinent during his time. However, his writings were met with strong responses as many times he purported erroneous beliefs as being orthodoxy. One example, which is relevant to the discussion here, was his quotes from Taḥdhīr al-Nās.In other words, it was something compiled by Mawlānā Nānotwī’s detractors, those in the circle of ‘Abd al-Qādir Badāyūnī. A signature that is clearly out of place and unexpected is that of ‘Allāmah ‘Abd al-Ḥayy Laknawī, which Asrar Rashid capitalises on. But this signature does not seem to be genuine. Nor does it seem anything of note is known about the compiler ‘Abd al-Ghaffār. Given the context of Mawlānā Qāsim Nānotwī’s statements both in Taḥdhīr al-Nās and in his other writings, do these isolated and decontextualised quotes fairly represent his views? Hence, what he took issue with is it being the “sole meaning”. This is clear from Taḥdhīr al-Nās itself as he has himself said the verse indicates chronological finality. As was quoted from him earlier, Mawlānā Qāsim Nānotwī said: “The author of Taḥdhīr al-Nās does not mean that the sentence on Khātam al-Nabiyyīn doesn’t in any way indicate chronological finality or that chronological finality cannot be meant by the term ‘Khātam al-Nabiyyīn’. He himself has given two explanations of how chronological finality is meant and indicated [by the verse/term].” [60]